LB 

£541 

B8 


UC-NRLF 


*B    17    456 


^f 


^ 


l/  PEC  20  W1« 


ASPECTS  OF  COLLEGE 

AND 

UNIVERSITY  ADMINISTRATION 


a  report  to  the 
Trustees  of  Dartmouth  College 


BY 


HARRY    EDWIN    BURTON,    Ph.D., 

Daniel  Webster  Professor  of  the  Latin  Language 
and  Literature 


f  OF  . 


• 


Published  by  the  College 

Hanover,  N.  H. 

1916 


.    , ,   *  «        .. .  . 

:,.  .  :/'  ■••••. 


W             B 

O       -2 

W        « 

J       2 

j 

z  i 

£  *2 

H  g  ^ 

S  *  * 

H       £ 

DAR 
Offu 

>   \ 

5 

\  *i 

& 

a 

I 

ASPECTS  OF  COLLEGE  AND  UNIVERSITY 
ADMINISTRATION 

To  the  Trustees  of  Dartmouth  College: — 
Gentlemen : 

I  have  the  honor  to  submit  a  report  of  conditions  in  various 
colleges  and  universities,  based  upon  an  investigation  undertaken 
at  your  invitation  during  the  second  semester  of  the  year  1915-1916. 
•  Between  February  1  and  June  1,  I  visited  the  following  institu- 
tions in  the  order  given :  Yale  University,  Columbia  University, 
Princeton  University,  Western  Reserve  University,  the  Ohio  State 
University,  Oberlin  College,  the  University  of  Michigan,  the  Uni- 
versity of  Chicago,  the  University  of  Denver,  the  University  of 
Colorado,  Colorado  College,  Occidental  College,  Pomona  College, 
the  University  of  California,  Stanford  University,  Reed  College, 
the  University  of  Washington,  the  University  of  Minnesota,  the 
University  of  Wisconsin,  Williams  College,  Amherst  College. 

In  the  early  part  of  the  year  1916-1917  I  made  a  supplementary 
trip,  visiting  Brown  University  and  Harvard  University.  Every- 
where administrative  officers  and  members  of  faculties  were 
courteous  and  hospitable  and  discussed  conditions  in  their  institu- 
tions with  perfect  frankness.  I  was  particularly  glad  to  meet  in 
other  universities  and  colleges  many  who  had  been  students  or 
teachers  at  Dartmouth  and  who  were  therefore  in  a  position  to 
make  comparisons. 

I  realize  that  my  report  is  by  no  means  exhaustive.  There  are 
many  other  institutions  which  I  should  have  been  glad  to  visit,  had 
there  been  time.  It  will  of  course  be  understood  when  I  make 
general  statements  that  I  am  referring  only  to  those  colleges  and 
universities  which  are  included  in  this  report.  I  realize  also  that 
many  subjects  treated  might  be  of  interest  to  the  faculty  rather 
than  to  the  trustees,  but  it  has  seemed  best  to  include  in  one  report 
all  the  matters  which  I  have  had  opportunity  to  investigate. 

I.     Trustees 

» 

Boards  of  trustees  or  regents  show  a  wide  variation  in  numbers, 

those   of   the   endowed   institutions   being   in   general   much   larger 

than  those  of  the  state  universities.     Ohio  State,  for  example,  has 

only  six  members  on  its  board,  the  University  of  Colorado  seven, 

while    Pomona   has   29,    Princeton   30,   and   Brown   47    (including 

fellows  and  trustees).     Dartmouth  with  only  twelve,  has  a  smaller 


344202 


board  than  any  of  the  other  endowed  institutions,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  Harvard,  whose  governing  board — called  the  corporation — 
consists  of  the  president  and  six  fellows.  Harvard,  however,  has, 
in  addition  to  the  corporation,  a  board  of  overseers  of  30  members, 
elected  from  and  by  the  alumni,  whose  approval  is  necessary  in  the 
case  of  all  important  appointments  and  statutes  or  standing  votes 
affecting  the  general  policies  of  the  university. 

Alumni  representation  on  the  governing  board  (that  is,  the  elec- 
tion of  members  by  the  alumni)  is  the  rule  in  endowed  institutions, 
at  least  in  the  east  and  in  the  middle  states.  Dartmouth,  with  five 
alumni  trustees,  has  a  larger  proportion  of  alumni  representation 
than  any  other,  unless  we  may  regard  the  Harvard  board  of  over- 
seers as  an  integral  part  of  the  governing  board.  Williams  has  five 
in  a  total  of  sixteen ;  Amherst  five  in  a  total  of  seventeen ;  Yale  six 
in  a  total  of  sixteen ;  Oberlin  six  in  a  total  of  twenty-four ;  Prince- 
ton five  in  a  total  of  thirty.  Among  the  eastern  institutions  Brown 
is  peculiar  in  that  some  of  its  trustees  are  not  graduates  of  the  uni- 
versity. 

The  boards  of  regents  of  the  state  universities  are  either  appointed 
by  the  governor  of  the  state  or  are  elected  by  popular  vote,  and  in 
general  there  is  no  effort  to  secure  the  services  of  graduates  of  the 
institution,  a  situation  that  is  somewhat  surprising  to  an  eastern 
college  man.  The  University  of  Colorado  has  not  a  single  alumnus 
on  its  board.  Michigan  is  the  only  exception  ;  the  eight  members 
are*  usually  graduates  of  the  university.  The  damage  that  may  be 
done  by  a  non-graduate  or  non-academic  board  is  illustrated  by  a 
recent  experience  of  the  University  of  Washington,  when  an  at- 
tempt was  made  to  secure  the  appointment  of  regents  who  would 
change  the  lease  of  certain  university  property,  to  the  detriment  of 
the  university  and  the  profit  of  various  individuals.  The  attempt 
was  foiled  only  by  great  activity  on  the  part  of  the  alumni.  At  the 
University  of  Minnesota  they  rather  pride  themselves  on  the  fact 
that  politics  do  not  enter  into  the  selection  of  the  regents,  who  are 
appointed  by  the  governor ;  and  I  was  interested  in  the  significance 
of  a  remark  of  an  officer  of  the  university,  who,  speaking  of  the 
regents,  said:  "They  don't  interfere  with  the  university  very  much." 

There  is  great  variety  in  the  attitude  of  boards  of  trustees  or 
regents  toward  their  institutions,  especially  in  the  powers  delegated 
to  faculties.  <  There  is,  I  think,  a  growing  tendency  all  over  the 
country  to  increase  the  administrative  powers  of  the  faculty.  At 
Oberlin,  where  this  has  gone  further  than  anywhere  else,  the 
trustees  appear  to  have  only  two  functions ;  they  manage  invest- 
ments and  they  adopt,  as  a  matter  of  form,  the  recommendations 
of  the  faculty.  The  faculty  is  practically  the  board  of  control :  it 
discusses  and  recommends  even  the  expenditure  of  money  and  the 
erection  of  new  buildings ;  and,  although  salaries  are  low — thev 
are  virtually  fixed  by  the  faculty  itself — I  must  admit  that  I  found 
nowhere  a  more  contented  or  more  interested  faculty  than  that  at 


Oberlin,  except,  possibly,  at  Yale,  which,  in  certain  aspects  of 
faculty  control,  must  be  placed  close  to  Oberlin. 

The  growing  tendency  of  trustees  to  delegate  administrative 
functions  to  the  faculty  is  manifested  chiefly  m  two  ways, — first, 
in  the  matter  of  appointments  to  the  teaching  body,  of  which  i 
shall  speak  later,  and  secondly  in  the  creation  of  joint  committees 
of  trustees  and  faculty.  At  Amherst  and  Pomona  there  are  com- 
mittees of  this  sort  having  charge  of  grounds  and  buildings.  At 
Wisconsin  there  is  an  annual  meeting  of  the  regents  and  a  com- 
mittee of  the  faculty,  but  the  functions  ot  the  joint  meeting  are 
not  definite  and  nothing  of  importance  seems  to  nave  been  accom- 
plished. At  Princeton,  a  conference  committee,  consisting  of  a 
committee  of  the  trustees  and  a  committee  of  the  faculty,  was 
created  last  year  and  has  at  least  the  possibility  of  becoming  an 
active  and  useful  element  in  the  administration  of  the  university. 
One  of  its  functions  is  the  recommendation  to  the  trustees  of  candi- 
dates for  honorary  degrees,  at  the  suggestion  of  the  various  de- 
partments. The  trustees  last  year  adopted  a  recommendation  of 
this  committee  that  members  of  the  faculty  should  not  be  permitted 
to  do  tutoring  during  term  time. 

At  Yale  there  is  no  joint  committee,  but  the  permanent  officers 
of  the  university  lunch  with  the  members  of  the  corporation  once 
each  term,  and  there  are  faculty  representatives  on  certain  com- 
mittees of  the  corporation.  Moreover,  the  university  council,  com- 
posed of  the  administrative  officers  of  the  university  and  repre- 
sentatives of  the  faculties,  acts  as  a  sort  of  advisory  board  for  the 
corporation.  At  Oberlin  the  prudential  committee,  which  acts  for 
the  trustees  in  almost  all  matters,  is  composed  of  the  president, 
two  resident  trustees,  the  deans,  the  treasurer,  the  secretary,  and  the 
superintendent  of  buildings.  At  Reed  there  is  a  similar  committee, 
the  welfare  committee,  consisting  of  the  president,  two  trustees, 
and  two  members  of  the  faculty  elected  by  the  faculty. 

It  must  be  confessed  that,  except  at  Oberlin  and  Reed,  the  idea 
of  joint  deliberations  of  trustees  and  faculty  is  still  in  its  infancy. 
We  are  still  far  from  adopting  the  plan  convincingly  advocated  by 
President  Schurman  and  others  of  having  faculty  representatives 
on  the  board  of  trustees.  As  a  beginning,  however,  I  have  been 
favorably  impressed  with  the  possibilities  of  this  scheme  of  joint 
committees,  not  only  as  a  means  of  giving  to  the  trustees  valuable 
information,  but  as  tending  to  develop  in  the  faculty  an  increased 
sense  of  responsibility  and  loyalty. 

II.     The  Budget 

In  most  institutions  the  budget  is  prepared  by  the  trustees  or  by 
a  committee  of  the  trustees  without  previous  discussion  or  recom- 
mendation on  the  part  of  the  faculty  or  a  committee  of  the  faculty. 
The    only    exceptions     I    have    noted    are    Oberlin,     where    the 


budget  is  prepared  by  the  faculty  and  is  submitted  to  the  trustees 
for  their  approval ;  Minnesota,  where  it  is  first  considered  by  a 
faculty  committee  called  the  advisory  committee;  and  Reed,  where 
all  proposed  recommendations  of  the  president  relating  to  the  bud- 
get are  first  submitted  to  a  faculty  council  of  eight  members; 
unless  five  agree,  the  matter  goes  to  a  small  joint  committee  of 
trustees  and  faculty. 

In  other  institutions  department  heads  are  usually  consulted  re- 
garding the  needs  of  their  departments.  At  Harvard,  Yale,  Col- 
umbia, Wisconsin,  Michigan,  and  California,  each  department  head 
in  consultation  with  his  department  prepares  a  budget,  and,  in 
most  of  these  institutions,  the  department  budgets  pass  through  the 
hands  of  the  dean  before  reaching  the  president. 

In  most  of  the  smaller  institutions  the  process  is  quite  informal — 
a  personal  interview  of  the  president  with  the  department  head. 
At  Williams,  on  the  other  hand,  each  department  head  is  required 
to  submit  at  the  end  of  each  year  a  report  of  the  work  of  his  depart- 
ment, which  is  afterward  printed,  and  at  the  same  time  a  budget 
for  his  department  for  the  following  year.  This  report  of  the 
work  of  departments  at  Williams  is,  so  far  as  I  know,  unique,  ex- 
cept as  such  material  is  included  in  the  reports  of  presidents  and 
deans. 


III.     The  President 

It  may  not  be  improper  to  record  some  impressions  regarding 
college  presidents.  The  position  of  the  president  and  his  activities 
are  usually  determined  rather  by  his  disposition  than  by  law  or 
tradition.  I  was  interested  in  the  statement  of  several  presidents 
that  the  president  should  regard  himself  rather  as  a  member  of  the 
faculty  than  as  a  member  of  the  board  of  trustees.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  in  several  institutions,  for  example  the  Case  School  in 
Cleveland,  the  University  of  Michigan,  and  Leland  Stanford,  he 
is  not  a  member  of  the  board.  In  some  institutions  the  president's 
powers  have  been  restricted  by  delegating  certain  functions  to  the 
faculty,  especially  the  recommendation  of  new  members  of  the 
faculty.  At  Stanford  the  president  must  consult  the  advisory 
board  of  the  faculty  regarding  all  important  executive  acts.  At 
Colorado  College  an  interesting  experiment  has  been  put  into  oper- 
ation on  the  resignation  of  President  Slocum.  The  faculty  nomin- 
ated six  members  from  whom  the  trustees  have  chosen  three,  who 
will  perform  all  administrative  functions  hitherto  belonging  to  the 
president,  at  least  until  the  election  of  a  new  president. 

Speaking  broadly,  there  are  two  types  of  college  presidents — 
the  autocratic  and  the  non-autocratic.  The  autocratic  president 
believes  in  complete  centralized  power  and  more  or  less  frankly 
runs  the  institution.    He  appoints  all  committees,  is  himself  a  mem- 


ber  of  several,  and  dominates  the  committees  of  which  he  is  a 
member.  I  find  that  a  president  of  this  type  is  subject  to  the  private 
criticism  of  members  of  his  faculty;  in  faculty  meeting  he  may  be 
violently  attacked  or,  on  the  other  hand,  the  meeting  may  exhibit 
only  a  peaceful  acquiescence  in  matters  which  are  known  to  be 
foregone  conclusions.  The  autocratic  president  may  administer 
his  institution  with  great  success,  but  the  non-autocratic  president, 
or  the  one  who  at  least  does  not  openly  exercise  despotic  power, 
finds  a  better  disposition  in  his  faculty, — a  spirit  of  content,  a  great- 
er interest,  a  feeling  of  personal  responsibility  for  the  affairs  of  the 
institution. 

Incidentally  I  may  say  that  I  found  almost  no  college  or  univer- 
sity in  which  the  president  does  not  publish  an  annual  report.  In 
many  cases  this  is  accompanied  by  a  report  of  the  dean  or  deans 
and  other  officials.  This  seems  to  me  an  exceedingly  valuable  thing, 
not  only  as  offering  information  to  alumni  and  others,  but  as 
crystalizing  certain  problems  for  the  consideration  of  trustees  or 
faculty. 


IV.    The  Dean 

The  duties  and  powers  of  college  deans  are  more  or  less  exten- 
sive in  the  various  institutions,  but,  speaking  generally,  deans 
appear  to  be  the  busiest  of  all  college  officers.  The  amount  of  work 
done  by  some  of  them  is  prodigious.  For  example,  Dean  Jones  at 
Yale,  in  addition  to  the  routine  work  of  the  office,  presides  in 
faculty  meetings,  appoints  all  committees,  and,  in  consultation  with 
the  president,  determines  the  amount  of  salaries;  he  has  a  special 
committee  appointed  by  himself  which  he  consults  on  important 
matters.  Dean  Leutner  at  Western  Reserve  appoints  all  com- 
mittees, is  a  member  of  several,  and  does  most  of  the  work  of  the 
committees  of  which  he  is  a  member;  he  appoints  the  advisors  and 
practically  controls  the  matter  of  discipline  for  low  scholarship. 

In  the  smaller  institutions  and,  in  fact,  in  some  of  the  larger 
ones,  the  dean  carries  one  or  more  courses.  It  seems  to  be  a  pre- 
vailing opinion  that  every  dean  should  do  some  teaching.  At 
Wisconsin  and  Minnesota  the  dean  prepares  the  budget. 

At  some  of  the  universities, — for  example,  Harvard,  Princeton, 
Chicago,  and  California, — there  is  a  dean  of  the  faculty,  a  sort  of 
vice-president,  with  none  of  the  functions  usually  assigned  to  a 
dean.  At  Chicago  there  are  twelve  deans,  not  including  those  of 
the  professional  schools ;  five  of  these  are  deans  of,  the  so-called 
junior  colleges,  their  functions  being  those  of  class-officers  or 
advisors. 


V.    The  Faculty 
Appointment }  Promotion  and  Dismissal 

In  many  of  the  institutions  visited  there  is  some  method  of 
faculty  recommendation  in  the  matter  of  appointment,  promotion, 
and  dismissal,  of  officers  of  instruction.  In  some  the  whole  faculty 
of  permanent  officers  makes  recommendations  to  the  trustees ;  in 
others  the  work  is  done  by  a  committee  of  the  faculty.  At  Yale 
the  first  system  appears  in  its  most  developed  form.  In  the  case  of 
a  candidate  for  an  instructorship  or  the  first  term  of  an  assistant 
professorship,  the  department  concerned  recommends  directly  to 
the  faculty;  in  the  case  of  a  candidate  for  a  professorship  or  the 
second  term  of  an  assistant  professorship  (that  is,  a  position  that 
may  be  regarded  as  permanent),  the  dean  appoints  a  committee 
(partly  from  the  department  concerned,  partly  from  related  de- 
partments, and  partly  from  unrelated  departments)  ;  this  commit- 
tee considers  candidates  and  makes  recommendations  to  the  govern- 
ing board  of  the  faculty,  which  consists  of  all  the  full  professors. 
It  is  said  that  both  the  committees  and  the  faculty  consider  candi- 
dates with  the  greatest  care,  and  that  it  is  not  uncommon  for  the 
faculty  to  reject  candidates  recommended  by  the  committees.  The 
recommendations  of  the  faculty  are  practically  always  adopted  by 
the  corporation. 

The  Yale  faculty  is  enthusiastic  regarding  its  appointment  sys- 
tem. Dean  Jones,  for  example,  says  that  a  group  knows  more  than 
any  one  man;  that  the  system  creates  esprit  de  corps  and  a  sense 
of  responsibility.  It  is  claimed  also  that  it  stimulates 
the  interest  of  departments  in  one  another.  On  the  other 
hand,  several  prominent  officers  of  other  institutions  made  the 
identical  criticism  that  the  Yale  faculty  is  mediocre  and  that  its 
mediocrity  is  due  to  the  method  of  appointment;  that  it  tends  to 
keep  out  a  man  not  socially  attractive.  To  me  personally,  laying 
aside  the  question  of  mediocrity,  the  explanation  was  not  convinc- 
ing. I  do  not  believe  that  the  Yale  faculty  is  in  any  large  degree 
influenced  by  the  social  qualities  of  candidates.  A  counter  claim 
might  be  made  to  the  effect  that  Yale  is  conspicuously  well  equipped 
with  good  teachers,  that  personal  qualities  are  important  in  the 
teacher,  if  not  in  the  investigator,  and  that  the  Yale  system  allows 
a  consideration  of  personal  qualities  which  would  hardly  be  possible 
under  a  one-man  appointment  system. 

At  Western  Reserve  and  at  Oberlin  the  system  is  similar  to  that 
at  Yale.  At  Western  Reserve  the  committee  for  preliminary  con- 
sideration of  candidates  consists  of  members  of  the  department 
concerned  and  of  related  departments.  The  faculty  (that  is,  the 
full  professors)  in  the  year  1913-1914  held  thirteen  meetings  for 
the  consideration  of  candidates.  At  Oberlin  the  president  is  usually 
a  member  of  the  appointment  committee.  The  faculty, — that  is, 
the    permanent    officers,    called    the    council, — recommends    to    the 

8 


prudential  committee,  the  joint  committee  before  mentioned.  This 
committee  usually  takes  final  action,  without  reference  to  the  whole 
board  of  trustees.  In  both  institutions  the  president  and  the  mem- 
bers of  the  faculty  are  enthusiastic  advocates  of  the  system. 

At  Stanford,  Reed,  Minnesota,  and  Washington,  recommenda- 
tion is  made  by  a  committee,  without  reference  to  the  faculty.  At 
Stanford  there  is  an  advisory  board  of  nine  professors,  and  no 
appointment  is  recommended  to  the  trustees  without  the  approval 
of  this  board.  The  president;  though  not  a  member  of  the  board, 
has  the  initiative  in  the  matter  of  appointment  and  no  recommend- 
ations originate  in  the  board  itself.  I  may  quote  from  the  report  of 
the  committee  of  trustees  which  recommended  this  method  of 
appointment: — "Public  spirit  dies  where  we  are  debarred  from 
public  action ;  professors  are  interested  in  their  departments,  but 
nobody  except  the  president  considers  officially  the  whole  univer- 
sity or  particpates  officially  in  its  control." 

At  Reed  the  president  makes  recommendation  to  a  faculty  coun- 
cil of  eight  members.  Unless  five  agree,  the  matter  is  referred  to  a 
joint  committee  consisting  of  the  president,  two  trustees,  and  two 
members  of  the  faculty.  President  Foster  believes  this  to  be  the 
ideal  system.  In  School  and  Society  for  April  22,  1916,  he  states 
its  advantages  for  president,  trustees,  and  faculty.  His  argument 
is  convincing  and  the  whole  article,  under  the  title  "Faculty  Partic- 
ipation in  College  Government,"  is  most  illuminating. 

At  Minnesota  a  committee  of  the  faculty  discusses  appointments, 
promotions,  and  dismissals  and  makes  recommendations,  through 
the  dean,  to  the  board  of  regents.  The  recommendations  are  always 
adopted  and  President  Vincent  regards  the  system  as  a  great  help 
to  the  president.  In  several  cases  dismissal  has  been  recommend- 
ed by  this  committee. 

At  the  University  of  Washington  the  faculty  have  no  responsibil- 
ity for  appointments,  but  in  the  matter  of  promotions  there  is  an  in- 
teresting svstem.  Every  teacher  is  considered  for  promotion  at  the 
end  of  a  five-year  term ;  if  it  is  a  question  of  promotion  from  an 
associate  professorship  to  a  full  professorship,  all  the  professors 
consider  the  case;  if  from  an  assistant  professorship  to  an  associate 
professorship,  all  the  professors  of  the  group  of  related  depart- 
ments; if  from  an  instructorship  to  an  assistant  professorship,  the 
members  of  the  department  only.  If  a  teacher  is  not  promoted  at 
the  end  of  a  five-year  term,  he  may  be  considered  at  any  time  there- 
after. 

In  other  institutions  visited  the  system  is  less  definite.  At  Michi- 
gan the  president  sometimes  appoints  a  committee  of  the  faculty 
to  consider  the  appointment  of  a  full  professor.  It  is  perhaps  sig- 
nificant of  the  feeling  in  institutions  of  this  type  that  at  Michigan 
faculty  meetings  are  rarely  held  and  that  few  men  take  any  interest 
in  the  university  outside  of  their  own  departments. 


At  California  the  president  may,  if  he  wishes,  consult  a  commit- 
tee of  heads  of  related  departments  regarding  a  contemplated 
appointment.  It  may  be  said  that  some  members  of  the  California 
faculty  are  critical  of  existing  conditions  and  strongly  in  favor  of 
greater  faculty  powers.  The  claim  is  made  that  the  dignity  of  a 
faculty  is  maintained  only  if  it  has  administrative  functions.  It  is 
true  at  least  that  faculty  meetings  at  California  have  a  meagre 
attendance  and  there  is  apparently  little  interest  in  the  administra- 
tion or  condition  of  the  university.  At  the  other  institutions  visited 
appointments  and  promotions  are  made  on  the  recommendation  of 
the  president,  in  consultation  with  the  heads  of  the  departments 
concerned.  At  some  of  these  places,  however,  there  is  much  talk  of 
the  desirability  of  increased  faculty  power. 

I  have  myself  been  convinced,  not  only  by  the  arguments  in  favor 
of  faculty  recommendation  but  also  by  conditions  in  those  institu- 
tions where  it  is  in  operation,  that  it  is  highly  beneficial  for  a  faculty 
either  as  a  whole,  or  through  a  committee,  to  have  the  power  of 
recommendation  in  these  matters.  Between  the  two  general 
methods,  in  spite  of  the  apparent  success  of  the  former  at  Yale, 
Western  Reserve,  and  Oberlin,  I  am  in  favor  of  the  delegation  of 
this  power  to  a  large  committee,  without  reference  to  the  faculty. 
There  is,  I  think,  less  danger  of  political  manipulation.  Moreover, 
many  members  of  so  large  a  body  as  a  faculty  must  inevitably 
fail  to  give  much  personal  consideration  to  matters  under  discus- 
sion ;  their  feeling  of  responsibility  would  be  slight  and  their  votes 
would  depend  in  some  degree  upon  the  persuasiveness  of  speakers. 

Committees  of  the  Faculty 

In  addition  to  the  ordinary  committees  which  are  found  in  one 
form  or  another  in  most  colleges  there  are  some  of  a  more  or  less 
unusual  nature  which  are  worth  noting. 

At  Chicago  a  special  committee  was  appointed  last  year  whose 
function  is  to  standardize  the  quality  and  quantity  of  work  required 
in  the  various  courses.  This  committee  will  consider  the  amount 
of  time  required  for  preparation  and  the  nature  of  examinations ; 
it  will  question  good  students  who  have  taken  the  courses  in  recent 
years  as  to  the  preparation  required  and  the  value  of  the  courses. 
The  Chicago  faculty  is  sceptical  of  the  ability  of  the  committee  to 
get  the  needed  information  and  in  general  is  not  hopeful  of  results. 

The  College  of  Science,  Literature,  and  the  Arts  at  Minnesota 
has  only  two  committees, — the  advisory  committee  and  the  admin- 
istrative board.  The  advisory  committee  is  selected  by  the  presi- 
dent and  dean  from  a  list  of  nominations  of  the  faculty;  but  those 
having  the  most  votes  are  invariably  chosen.  This  committee  has 
no  powers ;  it  is  strictly  advisory.  Among  other  things  it  recom- 
mends appointments,  promotions,  dismissals,  and  salaries.  There 
is     a     similar     committee     at     Stanford.         The     administrative 

.     10 


board  is  composed  of  the  assistant  dean  (chairman),  the  dean,  the 
dean  of  women,  the  dean  of  the  School  of  Education,  and  two 
members  chosen  by  the  faculty.  It  has  wide  functions,  including 
admission,  and  discipline  for  low  scholarship.  The  members  carry 
only  about  half  of  the  regular  amount  of  teaching.  There  is  also 
at  Minnesota  a  university  committee  of  five  members  on  intramural 
sports, — the  only  faculty  committee  of  this  sort  that  I  have  found. 

The  two  important  committees  at  Reed  have  already  been  men- 
tioned. The  council  is  composed  of  the  president  and  eight  mem- 
bers elected  by  the  faculty.  All  proposed  recommendations  of  the 
president  to  the  trustees  relating  to  appointments,  promotions,  dis- 
missals, salaries,  and  budget  must  be  presented  to  the  council.  In 
case  five  members  are  in  opposition,  the  matter  is  submitted  to  the 
welfare  committee,  which  consists  of  the  president,  two  trustees, 
and  two  members  of  the  faculty,  elected  by  the  faculty. 

At  California  the  welfare  committee  considers  the  personal  wel- 
fare of  the  faculty  as  a  whole,  or  of  individual  members.  The 
chairman  is  an  emeritus  professor.  The  committee  is  self-perpet- 
uating-. It  has  several  times  appealed  successfully  to  the  regents  on 
behalf  of  a  member  of  the  faculty  in  distress  on  account  of  illness 
or  debt ;  and  on  other  occasions  has  saved  members  of  the  faculty 
who  were  in  danger  of  losing  their  positions  and  ruining  their 
academic  careers.  It  induced  the  regents  to  appropriate  a  con- 
siderable sum  of  money  for  the  faculty  club. 

Class-Officers  and  Advisors 

Class-officers  are  found  in  only  a  few  places  and  those,  with  two 
exceptions,  small  institutions.  They  are  Yale,  Amherst,  Colorado 
College,  Occidental,  Pomona,  and  Chicago.  At  Yale  the  class- 
officer  is  a  kind  of  assistant  dean ;  he  presides  in  the  class  faculty 
meeting,  an  administrative  device  that  was  abandoned  some  years 
ago  at  Dartmouth.  He  has,  with  the  students  of  his  class,  only 
such  relations  as  may  be  formed  in  a  dean's  office.  At  Amherst 
the  class-officers  have  a  similar  function  and  constitute  the  admin- 
istration committee.  At  Occidental  and  Pomona  the  class-officers 
are  the  only  advisors,  but  their  relation  with  students  is  academic 
rather  than  personal.  At  Chicago  there  are  five  deans  for  the 
freshman  and  sophomore  classes ;  they  are  practically  class-officers 
or  advisors  under  another  name. 

Advisory  systems  are  found  nearly  everywhere,  and  this  matter 
has  in  the  past  few  years  been  given  so  much  attention  in  the  col- 
lege world  that  I  shall  treat  it  in  some  detail,  giving  the  systems 
found  in  the  various  institutions  and  the  criticisms  of  those  who 
are  familiar  with  their  operation. 

At  Yale  the  advisors — called  division  officers — are  appointed  by 
the  class-officers.  Each  looks  after  from  20  to  35  students,  fresh- 
men  and   sophomores,   but   it   is   admitted   that  they   do  little   for 

11 


sophomores.  Registrar  Merritt  says  that  the  system  is  of  little  use ; 
that  it  is  unwise  to  give  too  much  advice  to  students  and,  in  any 
case,  they  do  not  want  it.  As  usual,  a  few  of  the  advisors  accom- 
plish something,  but  Dean  Jones  says  the  system  is  not  worth  the 
trouble.  The  relation  is  largely  official  and  disciplinary ;  it  rarely 
becomes  personal.  The  members  of  the  faculty  with  whom  I 
talked  agreed  unanimously  with  the  views  expressed  by  the  admin- 
istrative officers. 

At  Amherst  there  are  advisors  for  all  classes,  but  the  advisory 
relation  is  frankly  not  intended  to  be  a  personal  one ;  it  seems  to 
involve  little  more  than  approval  of  elective  cards.  At  Williams 
all  freshman  instructors  are  utilized  as  advisors,  but  the  system  is 
not  well  organized.  In  1915-1916  assignments  were  not  made  until 
Christmas.  Students  rarely  see  their  advisors  and  the  system  is 
said  to  be  more  or  less  of  a  farce.  Dean  Ferry  believes  that  no 
advisory  system  is  good  for  anything. 

The  system  at  Columbia  was  established  with  the  idea  that  the 
advisor  would  become  the  personal  friend  of  his  students.  But  the 
relationship  has  in  most  cases  became  purely  academic,  chiefly  for 
the  approval  of  elections.  Each  advisor  has  from  ten  to  fifteen 
students.  Professor  Jones,  director  of  admissions,  thinks  it  a  good 
thing  for  freshmen,  but  others  regard  it  as  of  very  little  value. 

At  Princeton  the  freshman  class  is  divided  into  twenty  sections 
and  each  has  an  advisor.  There  are  no  advisors  beyond  freshman 
year.  Registrar  Jones  believes  the  system  entirely  artificial  and  in- 
effective, and  tells  a  story  of  sending  a  student  to  his  advisor  who 
telephoned  the  registrar  to  ask  why  the  student  was  sent  to  him, 
as  he  had  never  seen  him  before.  The  few  advisors  who  are  of 
any  use,  he  says,  would  give  advice  to  a  group  of  students  anyway. 
Dean  McClenahan,  who  has  charge  of  the  system,  thinks  it  works 
well  in  some  cases ;  and  that  at  least  it  makes  a  good  impression 
on  parents.  But  he  admits  that  he  has  put  in  some  seniors  as 
advisors,  that  they  are  much  better,  and  that  he  hopes  ultimately  to 
use  seniors  altogether.  With  one  exception  the  members  of  the 
faculty  with  whom  I  talked  regarded  the  faculty  advisory  system 
as  nearly  or  quite  useless. 

At  Western  Reserve  there  is  the  anomaly  of  advisors  for  upper- 
classmen  and  none  for  freshmen.  The  dean  makes  the  appoint- 
ments and  says  the  system  is  of  little  use.  There  is  no  personal 
relation.  When  a  student  has  selected  his  major  study,  a  member 
of  that  department  becomes  his  advisor.  At  Ohio  State 
there  was  once  a  system,  but  it  fell  into  disuse,  and  now  the 
Y.  M,  C.  A.  and  the  Y.  W.  C.  A.  appoint  senior  advisors.  At 
Oberlin  the  dean  is  the  only  advisor  of  freshmen.  At  the  end  of 
freshman  year  each  student  selects  an  advisor  for  the  rest  of  his 
course.  At  the  beginning  of  junior  year  he  chooses  his  major  and 
the  head  of  the  department  becomes  a  second  advisor.  Both  sign 
the  elective  cards.     There  is  no  personal  relation. 


-  -v 


12 


At  Michigan  various  systems  have  been  tried,  but  in  the  College 
of  Literature,  Science,  and  the  Arts  all  have  been  discarded.  Now 
the  women  have  appointed  juniors  as  advisors,  and  the  plan  is 
working  well;  the  men  are  considering  a  similar  system.  The 
School  of  Engineering  has  one  of  the  few  successful  faculty  ad- 
visory systems  I  have  found.  Each  instructor  (called  a  "mentor") 
has  ten  students  (called  "mentees")  and  retains  the  same  ones 
throughout  the  course.  The  relation  is  personal  as  well  as  acad- 
emic, and  the  system  is  said  to  be  working  very  well. 

At  Chicago  the  advisory  system  has  been  abandoned.  The 
deans  and  the  heads  of  departments  in  which  students  take  their 
majors  act  as  advisors.  The  women  have  student  advisors  assigned 
by  the  Y.  W.  C.  A.  At  Wisconsin  the  dean  assigns  freshmen,  in 
varying  numbers,  to  members  of  the  faculty.  At  the  beginning  of 
junior  year  the  student  comes  under  the  supervision  of  a  member 
of  his  major  department.  There  is  no  attempt  at  a  personal  rela- 
tion.    Members  of  the  faculty  differ  as  to  the  value  of  the  system. 

Faculty  advisors  are  still  appointed  at  Minnesota  for  freshmen 
and  sophomores,  though  the  president,  the  assistant  dean,  who 
makes  the  assignments,  and  many  members  of  the  faculty  agree 
that  the  system  is  a  dead  letter  and  that  the  advisors  are  useless. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  though  still  appointed,  they  have  been  super- 
seded in  their  activities  by  senior  advisors  for  both  men  and 
women,  and  the  assistant  dean  is  enthusiastic  about  their  work. 
On  registration  day  the  student  council  has  a  group  of  students  at 
hand  to  help  freshmen.  Each  freshman  is  at  that  time  assigned 
to  a  senior  and  urged  to  go  to  him  at  once. 

At  the  University  of  Colorado  each  advisor  has  about  fourteen 
students.  The  relation  is  academic  and  Dean  Hellems  is  doubtful 
of  its  value.  At  Colorado  College  practically  all  members  of  the 
faculty  are  advisors  for  freshmen  and  sophomores ;  each  has  about 
eight.  The  relation  is  supposed  to  be  personal,  but  there  is  a 
general  agreement  in  the  faculty  that  it  works  out  in  that  way  in 
only  a  few  cases. 

Until  this  year  the  University  of  California  had  a  unique  ar- 
rangement. Forty  or  fifty  members  of  the  faculty  were  appointed 
advisors  by  the  dean  of  the  lower  college.  The  relation  between 
advisor  and  students  was  supposed  to  be  personal,  and  each  advisor 
was  paid  $100  a  year  for  the  purposes  of  entertainment.  But  in 
spite  of  this  generosity  the  system  was  a  failure  and  was  abandoned. 
Dean  Putnam  reports  the  result  of  an  investigation  as  follows: — 
"It  was  clear  that  the  relationship  of  freshman  and  advisor  was 
regarded  by  a  large  portion  of  the  student  body  as  perfunctory 
and  artificial  and  that  much  of  the  effort  of  the  advisors,  though 
conscientiously  given,  was  on  this  account  being  wasted.  While 
no  doubt  some  freshmen  have  been  very  decidedly  benefited  by  the 
acquaintanceship  with  their  faculty  advisors,  I  am  convinced  that 
this  system  cannot  be  made  wholly  successful  unless  a  more  natural 

13 


relationship  between  student  and  advisor  can  be  found." 
(President's  Report,  1914-1915,  p.  158)  Two  hundred  seniors 
have  been  appointed  as  advisors,  and  in  the  latter  part  of  a 
student's  course  he  comes  under  the  care  of  an  instructor  in  his 
major  department. 

At  Stanford  the  only  advisor  is  a  graduate  student,  who  is  a 
member  of  the  student  council  and  acts  as  advisor  for  the  whole 
university. 

At  Reed  students  select  their  advisors.  At  the  time  of  registra- 
tion they  are  required  to  visit  all  their  instructors  and  choose  one 
as  advisor.  An  instructor  may  have  none  or  as  many  as  twenty 
students.  In  later  years  most  students  have  as  advisor  an  instructor 
in  their  major  subject.  A  personal  relation  is  often  established  and 
the  system  is  said  to  work  very  well. 

The  function  of  the  advisor  at  the  University  of  Washington  is 
usually  limited  to  a  scrutiny  of  the  elective  card.  At  the  beginning 
of  junior  year  the  student  comes  under  the  charge  of  the  head  of 
his  major  department.  The  relation  in  both  cases  is  academic. 
For  personal  advice  there  are  a  dean  of  men  and  a  dean  of  women, 
who  are  responsible  for  the  life  of  the  dormitories  and  the  frater- 
nity and  sorority  houses,  and  are  constantly  consulted  by  individuals. 

The  Brown  system  is  similar  to  that  at  Dartmouth.  Service  on 
the  advisory  board  is  voluntary  and  each  advisor  has  from  five  to 
seven  students,  all  freshmen,  though  the  relation — a  personal  one 
as  at  Dartmouth — sometimes  continues  through  the  four  years. 
Some  members  of  the  faculty  believe  that  the  system  justifies  its 
existence,  though  one  man  admitted  that  he  never  sees  most  of 
his  students  after  their  first  call ;  and  another  estimated  that  only 
one  out  of  ten  gets  any  help  from  it.  The  Brown  system  is  supple- 
mented by  a  series  of  lectures  to  freshmen  on  the  opportunities 
offered  by  the  university,  methods  of  work  in  lecture-room  and 
laboratory,  college  life,  etc. 

At  Harvard  there  was,  until  recently,  an  advisory  system  for 
freshmen  only,  with  twenty  to  twenty-five  students  assigned  to 
each  member  of  the  board.  This  proved  to  be  unsuccessful,  as  was 
also  the  use  of  seniors  as  advisors.  Now  service  is  compulsory  ex- 
cept in  the  case  of  members  of  the  faculty  who  are  excused.  Four 
or  five  freshmen  are  assigned  to  each  advisor;  he  is  supposed  to 
act  as  their  advisor  throughout  their  course,  and  he  has  a  hold  on 
them  from  the  fact  that  he  must  sign  their  elective  cards.  One 
man  told  me  that  he  knew  all  his  students  intimately ;  another,  that 
he  maintained  a  connection  with  about  half,  but  that  there  were 
many  members  of  the  faculty  who  believed  that  the  system  was 
not  worth  the  trouble. 

I  may  mention  here  an  interesting  device  recently  put  into  oper- 
ation at  Harvard, — the  scholarship  service  bureau,  organized  by 
Phi  Beta  Kappa.  An  executive  committee  of  members  of  the 
society  has  associated  with  itself  a  group  of  students  of  high  rank 

14 


who  are  willing  to  give  assistance — advice,  not  instruction — with- 
out payment.  The  committee  keeps  an  office-hour  and  assigns  to 
a  member  of  the  group  each  student  who  makes  application.  It  is 
not  a  tutoring  bureau.  The  student  advisor  helps  the  other  in  the 
selection  of  his  courses  and  makes  suggestions  regarding  methods 
of  study,  the  taking  of  notes,  etc.  The  system  is  regarded  as  bene- 
ficial for  both  parties. 

It  is  apparent  that,  nearly  everywhere,  faculty  advisory  systems 
have  been  a  more  or  less  complete  failure.  Where  no  personal 
relation  is  sought,  the  consensus  of  opinion  regards  the  system  as 
not  worth  the  trouble;  in  the  few  institutions  that  have  under- 
taken to  establish  a  personal  relation,  it  is  agreed  that  the  relation 
is  artificial  and  that  the  system  is  a  farce.  It  is  astonishing  that 
so  many  retain  a  system  which  they  frankly  admit  to  be  practically 
useless. 

At  Dartmouth  we  have  carried  the  advisory  idea  rather  further 
than  any  other  college.  In  fact,  we  have  a  double  system,  that  of 
class-officers  and  faculty  advisors.  The  advisors  are  supposed  to 
be  the  personal  friends  of  their  students;  otherwise  they  have  no 
reason  for  existence,  as  they  do  not  even  sign  elective  cards,  the 
only  function  of  faculty  advisors  in  many  places.  If  we  are  main- 
taining this  system  successfully,  we  are  doing  a  thing  that  few 
institutions  have  been  able  to  accomplish.  Personally  I  am  some- 
what sceptical  and  I  should  be  interested  in  the  results  of  an  invest- 
igation, undertaken  preferably  by  the  dean. 

Except  at  Harvard  the  senior  advisory  system  has  been  success- 
ful wherever  it  has  been  tried,  but  in  none  of  these  places,  I  think, 
are  fraternity  conditions  just  what  they  are  at  Dartmouth,  and  I 
should  be  doubtful  of  its  success  here.  As  a  matter  of  fact  we  do 
not  need  a  substitute  for  faculty  advisors.  We  have  a  system  al- 
ready established, — the  class-officers. 

Our  freshman  and  sophomore  class-officers  in  the  last  few  years 
have  been  not  mere  college  officials  but  real  advisors.  We  have 
actually  tried  out  two  systems  side  by  side  and,  to  my  mind,  the 
class-officers  have  undoubtedly  won.  If  I  had  not  seen  the  failure 
of  faculty  advisory  systems  in  so  many  places,  I  should  have  been 
inclined  to  regard  the  activity  of  the  class-officers  as  responsible  for 
the  very  doubtful  success  of  our  advisory  system.  As  it  is,  I 
believe  we  should  simply  congratulate  ourselves  upon  having  al- 
ready in  operation  a  better  system.  The  amount  of  teaching  of 
the  freshman  and  sophomore  class-officers  should  probably  be  re- 
duced. It  is  possible  that  there  should  be  two  freshman  class- 
officers,  like  the  deans  of  the  junior  colleges  at  Chicago,  who  would 
divide  the  class  between  them.  But  in  one  form  or  another  I 
believe  the  class-officer  system  is  the  solution  of  the  advisory 
problem. 


15 


Grading  Systems 

Nearly  all  the  institutions  visited  have,  like  Dartmouth,  adopted, 
with  variations,  the  letter  system  of  marking.  Harvard,  Brown, 
Williams,  Columbia,  Chicago,  Michigan,  Minnesota,  Stanford,  and 
Washington,  like  Dartmouth,  have  only  four  passing  grades,  A,  B, 
C,  and  D.  California  has  the  same  system,  though  it  uses  numbers 
instead  of  letters.  At  Brown  sixty  percent  is  regarded  as  the 
passing  mark,  and  the  letters  represent,  definitely,  ten  points  each. 
In  view  of  the  criticism  that  our  system  of  only  four  passing  grades 
does  not  give  opportunity  for  necessary  distinctions,  it  is  inter- 
esting to  note  that  Princeton,  Western  Reserve,  Ohio  State,  Ober- 
liri,  and  Occidental  have  five  passing  grades  and  Pomona  six ;  that 
Occidental  had  only  four,  but  found  it  necessary  to  add  a  fifth ; 
that,  while  Chicago  has  only  four  passing  grades,  it  recognizes 
A — ,  B — ,  and  C —  as  official  marks,  making  seven  in  all ;  more- 
over E  does  not  represent  a  failure,  but  a '  condition,  with  the 
privilege  of  a  second  examination.  At  Williams  many  of  the 
faculty  deplore  the  change  from  percentages  to  letters ;  they  con- 
tinue to  hand  in  plus  and  minus  marks,  though  these  are  not  record- 
ed at  the  office.  They  claim  that  proper  discrimination  is  impos- 
sible and  emphasize  the  difficulty  of  awarding  prizes. 

Amherst,  Wisconsin,  and  Colorado  College  retain  the  percentage 
system  and  the  University  of  Colorado  has  gone  back  from  the 
letter  system  to  percentages.  Reed  has  a  numerical  system,  one  to 
ten,  with  eight  passing  marks,  and  Yale  has  a  system  all  its  own, 
with  marks  ranging  from  zero  to  400.  It  is  evident  that  Dartmouth 
has  gone  as  far  as  any  other  college  in  the  matter  or  reducing  the 
number  of  grades. 

Some  institutions  have  a  point  system  like  that  at  Dartmouth, 
an  A  mark  carrying  more  points  than  B,  B  more  than  C,  etc.,  with 
the  requirement  of  a  minimum  number  of  points  for  graduation. 
Others  content  themselves  with  a  limitation  of  the  number  of  low 
marks  accepted  for  credit.  At  Columbia,  for  example,  not  more 
than  one  D  is  counted  toward  a  degree  in  any  one  semester.  At 
Western  Reserve^  the  mark  must  be  F,  or  better,  (the  marks  are 
E,  G,  F,  P,  D,  X)  in  at  least  thirty  three-hour  courses.  At  Chicago 
the  student  must  have  an  average  not  lower  than  C.  At  Amherst 
he  must  have  an  average  of  at  least  seventy  per  cent. 

Nearly  everywhere  outside  of  New  England  there  are  two  grades 
of  failure, — a  deficiency  with  the  privilege  of  a  second  examination, 
and  complete  failure.  Even  Princeton  retains  this  element  of  weak- 
ness. At  Oberlin  there  is  a  unique  but  quite  logical  arrangement : 
a  student  marked  deficient  (E)  may  take  a  second  examination 
unless  he  is  a  senior  in  the  second  semester.  In  that  case  he  must 
repeat  the  course  in  the  summer  session  or  the  following  year. 

Under  certain  circumstances  a  student  may  be  exempt  from  ex- 
aminations : — at  Yale,  if  he  has  honor  grade    (but  the  instructor 

16 


may  use  his  discretion);  at  Chicago,  seniors  of  high  rank;  at 
Minnesota,  seniors  with  no  failures  since  freshman  year  and  in 
good  standing  in  their  courses. 

Discipline  for  Low  Scholarship 

With  a  few  exceptions  Dartmouth  is,  in  this  matter,  more  severe 
and  more  automatic  than  the  other  institutions  I  have  visited. 
Amherst,  Williams,  Princeton,  Pomona  and,  possibly,  Minnesota 
and  Chicago  may  be  grouped  with  Dartmouth  in  the  more  or  less 
drastic  elimination  of  deficient  students.  In  the  central  states  and 
in  the  west  it  is  generally  agreed  that  the  certificate  system  of 
admission  allows  many  students  to  enter  college  who  at  least  for 
several  months  find  college  work  exceedingly  difficult ;  and  it  is  the 
general  attitude  of  college  administrators  that  such  students  should 
be  treated  with  leniency.  In  this,  as  in  other  college  relations,  the 
individual  receives  more  consideration  in  the  west  than  in  most  of 
the  eastern  colleges. 

It  is  understood,  of  course,  that  statements  based  upon  compara- 
tive grades  are  not  necessarily  conclusive.  Sixty  per  cent,  or  a  D 
grade,  in  one  institution  may  mean  something  quite  different  from 
what  it  means  in  another. 

At  Amherst  discipline  for  low  scholarship  is  more  severe  than 
at  Dartmouth,  though  perhaps  not  so  automatic, — that  is,  there 
is  more  consideration  of  the  individual.  A  student  making,  in  any 
semester,  less  than  fifty  per  cent  in  two  subjects  or  less  than  sixty 
per  cent  in  three  is  separated.  A  student  making  less  than  fifty 
per  cent  in  a  subject  in  the  first  semester  is  not  allowed  to  continue 
it  in  the  second  and  loses  his  privilege  of  absences. 

At  Pomona  a  student  who  falls  below  an  average  of  C,  or  has 
a  complete  failure  in  two  or  more  courses,  is  automatically  sepa- 
rated. I  may  say  incidentally  that  Pomona  has  a  very  high  repu- 
tation on  the  Pacific  coast.  California  and  Stanford  rate  her 
graduates  among  the  best  of  their  graduate  students. 

At  Williams  and  Princeton,  as  at  Dartmouth,  a  student  must 
'pass  three-fifths  of  his  work  to  remain  in  college.  At  Princeton 
from  80  to  100  students  are  separated  every  year.  Each  of  these 
has  the  privilege  of  appearing  before  the  committee,  and  a  fresh- 
man may  bring  an  upperclassman  as  an  advocate.  But  Dean 
McClenahan  says  that  the  rule  operates  practically  without  excep- 
tion. At  Minnesota  discipline  is  severe,  but  it  is  administered 
with  great  care.  President  Vincent  is  strongly  opposed  to  the 
automatic  treatment  of  students  for  low  scholarship,  absences,  etc. 
Many  are  very  poorly  prepared,  but  they  are  weeded  out  rapidly 
in  freshman  year.  Marks  are  reported  every  month  and  students 
are  separated  at  any  time,  even  during  the  first  semester  of  fresh- 
man year.  The  system  provides  for  personal  interviews  and  no 
one  is  separated  without  previous  warning. 

17 


At  Chicago  a  student  whose  average  is  below  D  may  be  sepa- 
rated at  the  end  of  the  first  or  second  quarter.  After  that,  a 
student  is  separated  at  any  time  when  his  grade  points  fall  ten 
below  the  standard,  an  allowance  of  two  for  each  tull  course.  It 
is  said  that  the  automatic  application  of  this  rule  has  had  a  most 
beneficial  effect. 

Other  institutions  show  great  variety  in  severity  and  in  the 
consideration  of  individual  conditions,  but,  in  general,  as  compared 
with  Dartmouth,  they  are  more  or  less  lax,  or  they  carry  individual 
treatment  so  far  that  it  is  impossible  to  discover  any  definite  prin- 
ciple of  discipline.  In  Yale  College  in  1914-1915  only  twenty-five 
were  separated  for  low  scholarship,  and  that  is  said  to  have  been 
a  rather  larger  number  than  usual.  Freshmen  are  usually  separated 
for  failures  in  three  courses,  but  every  case  is  considered  individ- 
ually. Action  originates  in  the  class  faculty;  from  that  it  goes  to 
the  dean  and  class-officer;  and  then  to  the  college  faculty.  After 
freshman  year  very  few  are  separated: — only  one  in  1914-1915. 
The  Yale  system  is  regarded  elsewhere  as  over-lenient. 

At  Columbia  about  twelve  freshmen  are  separated  each  year. 
Members  of  the  faculty  explain  that  it  is  unnecessary  to  send  stu- 
dents away,  as  they  may  make  up  their  deficiencies  in  the  extension 
courses. 

At  Ohio  State  a  student  is  supposed  to  be  separated  if  he  fails 
more  than  half  his  work;  but  in  practice  he  is  allowed  to  remain 
on  probation  through  another  semester.  In  the  central  states  it  is 
the  general  custom  to  allow  students  to  remain  through  the  year. 
At  Oberlin,  if  a  student  in  the  first  semester  passes  one-third  of 
his  work,  he  may  continue,  but  must  pass  all  his  courses  in  the 
second  semester.  At  Michigan  there  is  no  fixed  rule.  Dean 
Effinger  believes  that  each  case  should  be  treated  individually.  At 
Wisconsin  there  is  no  rule  and  it  appears  that  anyone  who  is  sepa- 
rated may  apply  for  immediate  readmission.  The  Colorado  insti- 
tutions are  notably  lax.  The  Chancellor  of  the  University  of 
Denver  frankly  admits  that  no  one  is  sent  away  for  low  scholar- 
ship, though  a  student  may  be  deprived  of  one  course  and  put  under 
the  special  charge  of  a  member  of  the  faculty.  At  the  University 
of  Colorado  there  is  a  rule  that  freshmen  must  pass  eight  hours, 
others  ten  hours.  If  they  do  not  reach  that  minimum  they  may 
be  suspended.  But  a  suspended  student  may  apply  for  immediate 
reinstatement  on  probation;  and  many  are  so  reinstated.  At  Colo- 
rado College  no  one  is  separated  at  the  end  of  the  first  semester. 
A  student  who  makes  less  than  nine  hours  is  on  probation  in  the 
second  semester,  and  a  good  many  are  separated  at  the  end  of  the 
yea*. 

With  the  exception  of  Pomona,  the  California  institutions  also 
are  decidedly  lax.  At  Occidental  there  is  a  rule  that  eight  semester 
hours  must  be  passed,  but  in  practice  very  few  are  separated, — 
not  more  than  one  or  two  at  the  end  of  the  first  semester.     Cali- 

18 


f  ornia,  too,  has  the  the  eight-hour  rule,  but  in  the  Colleges  of  Letters 
and  Sciences  only  three  or  four  are  separated  in  each  semester. 
Here,  also,  I  found  the  peculiar  custom  of  petitioning  for  imme- 
diate reinstatement. 

At  Reed  College,  in  this  matter  as  in  all  others,  every  student  is 
treated  strictly  as  an  individual.  There  is  no  rule,  and  few  are 
separated. 

At  Brown  and  Harvard,  as  at  Yale  and  the  western  institutions, 
every  case  is  treated  individually.  At  both  institutions  the  authori- 
ties are  merciful,  and  many  students  are  allowed  to  remain  in  col- 
lege who  have  failed  in  a  large  part  of  their  work. 

At  Brown  most  students  who  fail  four  courses  and  many  who 
fail  three  out  of  a  total  of  five  are  separated.  Regarding  the  Har- 
vard practice  I  found  it  difficult  to  obtain  definite  information. 
Few  are  separated  at  the  end  of  the  first  half-year.  At  the  end 
of  the  year  a  student  may  be  "dropped"  or  his  "connection  with 
the  college  may  be  severed."  In  the  latter  case  he  may  apply  for 
readmission  at  the  beginning  of  the  next  academic  year;  and  many 
are  thus  immediately  reinstated  on  the  understanding  that,  if  at 
any  time  their  records  are  unsatisfactory,  they  will  withdraw  upon 
request.  This  is  similar  to  the  practice  at  Ohio  State,  Wisconsin, 
and  California.  In  the  year  1914-1915,  twenty-two  freshmen  were 
dropped  (out  of  a  total  of  661  new  students)  ;  thirty-one  had  their 
connection  severed  and  might  apply  for  immediate  readmission. 

My  observations  have  not  convinced  me  that  it  would  be  wise  for 
us  to  relax  our  system  of  discipline  for  low  scholarship,  even 
though  I  have  listened  to  stories  of  students  who  were  unable  to 
do  the  work  of  freshman  year  and  ultimately  graduated  with 
honors.  An  occasional  individual  will  suffer,  but  the  knowledge 
that  three  failures  mean  inevitable  dismissal  is  an  incentive  so 
valuable  to  the  general  condition  of  the  college  that  I  should  hesi- 
tate to  recommend  any  change  in  attitude  or  practice  that  might 
weaken  its  effectiveness. 

It  must  be  said,  however,  that  we  should  not  take  too  much  pride 
to  ourselves  because  we  send  many  students  away.  As  Flexner 
says,  "It  is  comparatively  simple  to  extirpate  those  who  appear  to 
be  the  weaker  brethren;  but  it  is  not  a  whit  more  intelligent  than 
to  pull  every  aching  tooth."  It  may  well  be  that  the  colleges  that 
separate  a  much  smaller  proportion  than  we  do  have  a  higher 
standard  than  our  own;  that  is,  their  methods  may  secure  more 
work  or  better  results.  There  is  no  doubt  that  our  administrative 
officers  do  their  work  wisely  and  thoroughly  on  the  basis  of  the 
results  reported  to  them,  but  it  is  still  a  question  whether  we 
are  doing  all  that  is  possible  to  stimulate  the  intellectual  interest  of 
our  students. 


19 


The  Treatment  of  Absences 

I  have  found  nowhere  except  at  Pomona  and,  possibly,  Oberlin 
a  mechanism  for  the  regulation  of  attendance  so  automatic  as  the 
Dartmouth  system.  Cut-systems  are  practically  unknown  in  the 
west, — that  is,  there  is  no  definite  allowance  of  absences, — because 
it  is  assumed  that  students  will  attend  college  exercises  as  they 
have  attended  classes  in  school.  In  general  this  assumption  is  jus- 
tified, and  it  is  an  indication  of  the  difference  between  the  east  and 
the  west  in  the  attitude  of  students  toward  college. 

In  the  west  they  speak  of  going  to  "school"  when  they  mean  col- 
lege. They  are  more  inclined  to  learn  their  lessons  from  day  to 
day;  it  is  my  impression  that  a  large  proportion  of  failures  in 
western  colleges  is  due  to  poor  preparation  or  natural  inability, 
rather  than  to  idleness  or  other  interests.  And  students  do,  in  gen- 
eral, attend  their  college  exercises  as  a  matter  of  course. 

Even  in  the  west,  however,  there  are  cases  of  excessive  absence 
and  there  are  rules, — but  there  are  many  exceptions ;  here  again 
the  individual  is  always  considered.  At  the  University  of  Denver 
the  instructor  gives  zero  for  an  absence  unless  the  student  brings 
an  excuse  from  the  office ;  for  three  unexcused  absences  he  loses 
credit  for  the  course.  The  University  of  Colorado  had  a  cut  sys- 
tem with  an  automatic  penalty,  loss  of  hours ;  but  the  whole  system 
was  abandoned  and  the  dean  now  uses  his  discretion  in  the  treat- 
ment of  individual  cases.  The  instructor  hands  in  weekly  reports 
to  the  secretary,  who  submits  to  the  dean  cases  that  need  atten- 
tion; the  dean  interviews  each  student,  and  possibly  suspends  him. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  however,  there  are  very  few  cases  and  the 
penalty  is  rarely  needed.  At  Colorado  College  the  whole  matter 
of  absences  is  in  the  hands  of  the  instructors,  who  have  the  power 
to  refuse  credit  for  a  course. 

At  Stanford  and  California  the  situation  is,  at  least  from  the 
eastern  viewpoint,  chaotic;  and  I  doubt  if  even  the  attitude  of  the 
western  student  toward  his  college  work  justifies  the  total  lack  of 
system.  At  Stanford  no  record  is  kept  at  the  office.  Each  depart- 
ment is  supposed  to  have  its  own  treatment  of  absences.  But 
within  the  department  individual  instructors  vary ;  some  keep  no 
record  at  all.  At  California  attendance  is  graded,  like  scholarship, 
on  a  basis  of  one  to  five.  Until  recently  no  record  was  handed  in 
until  the  end  of  the  course.  Now  reports  are  made  in  the  middle 
of  the  semester.  If  the  instructor  marks  attendance  as  deficient 
(4)  or  a  failure  (5),  the  student  is  summoned  by  the  dean  and 
may  be  put  on  probation.  In  practice  it  appears  that  certain  depart- 
ments are  very  lax  and  it  is  admitted  that  some  instructors  keep 
no  record  of  attendance  whatever. 

At  Reed,  where  the  western  student  attitude  appears  at  its  best, 
no  record  of  absences  is  kept  at  the  office,  and  it  is  said  that  stu- 
dents are  practically  never  absent.  The  same  condition  holds  at 
the  University  of  Washington. 

20 


Pomona  has  the  only  cut  system  I  have  noted  in  a  western  col- 
lege. The  student  is  allowed  as  many  absences  as  the  number  of 
semester  hours  he  is  taking.  For  sixteen  excessive  absences  or  a 
major  fraction  thereof,  he  must  take  an  extra  hour;  and  excessive 
absences  accumulate  from  semester  to  semester.  If  in  one  course 
a  student  takes  twice  as  many  cuts  as  there  are  weekly  exercises 
he  must  take  an  extra  hour.  And  if  he  takes  eight  excessive  ab- 
sences from  assembly  (corresponding  to  our  chapel,  though  all  the 
exercises  are  not  religious),  he  is  suspended  for  one  semester. 

The  general  feeling  in  the  central  states  is  like  that  in  the  west, — 
that  attendance  is  not  a  serious  problem.  There  are  no  cut  systems, 
except  at  Western  Reserve,  and  rules  are  in  most  places  loosely 
administered.  This  is  the  case  especially  at  Wisconsin,  where  the 
matter  is  in  the  hands  of  the  instructors  and,  as  is  almost  inevitable 
under  this  arrangement,  there  is  the  greatest  laxity.  Some  instruc- 
tors admit  that  they  keep  no  record:  Excessive  absence  is  rarely 
penalized.  There  is  a  tradition  that,  if  a  student  is  absent  more 
than  one-fifth  of  the  exercises  in  a  course,  he  must  take  a  make-up 
examination.  But  as  this  is  a  penalty  for  the  instructor  as  well  as 
for  the  student  (in  fact  it  might  be  considered  a  privilege  for  the 
student)  the  instructor  avoids  it,  if  possible.  At  Chicago  a  stu- 
dent who  has  had  excessive  absences  is  summoned  by  the  dean  and, 
unless  he  offers  satisfactory  excuse,  is  reported  to  the  instructor 
concerned.  The  latter  assigns  any  penalty  or  none  at  all.  At  the 
University  of  Ohio  the  matter  of  attendance  is  in  the  hands  of  the 
departments.  There  is  a  rule  that  four  consecutive  absences  must 
be  reported  at  the  office,  but  the  rule  is  apparently  not  observed. 
There  are  no  monitors  and  no  record  of  absences  at  the  office. 

At  Michigan  and  Minnesota  the  system  is  more  strict,  though 
by  no  means  automatic.  At  Michigan  there  is  an  attendance  com- 
mittee to  receive  excuses,  and  theoretically  every  absence  must  be 
excused ;  it  is  admitted,  however,  that  instructors  are  careless  in  the 
matter  of  reporting.  There  is  no  definite  penalty  for  excessive  ab- 
sence, except  that  a  student  absent  more  than  eighteen  hours  in  a 
course  loses  the  course.  It  may  be  said  incidentally  that  in  most 
of  the  large  universities  little  absence  is  due  to  athletics  and  other 
outside  activities.  One  reason  is  the  fact  that  teams  and  clubs  are 
drawn  from  the  whole  university  and  no  one  department  is  seri- 
ously affected.  At  Minnesota  absences  are  reported  at  the  office 
every  day  and  excessive  absences  are  treated  by  a  faculty  commit- 
tee. The  two  stages  of  discipline  are,  first,  a  warning  and  then,  if 
the  absence  continues,  separation.  At  Oberlin,  where  student  life 
is  perhaps  more  carefully  supervised  than  in  any  other  college,  it  is 
not  surprising  to  find  strict  regulation  of  attendance.  The  system 
is  very  simple :  for  every  absence  the  student  must  give  a  satisfac- 
tory excuse  at  the  office ;  if  the  excuse  is  not  accepted,  he  is 
reported  to  the  instructor,  who  gives  zero  for  the  absence. 


21 


Western  Reserve  has  a  cut  system :  four  cuts  are  allowed  in  each 
course.  But  every  absence  must  be  made  up  and  the  instructor 
gives  a  zero  until  it  is  made  up.  There  is  no  fixed  penalty  for  over- 
cutting.  Theoretically,  more  than  two  unexcused  absences  in  a 
course  reduce  the  grade ;  but  in  practice  the  penalty  is  left  to  the 
.discretion  of  the  instructor,  who  may  even  drop  a  student  from  his 
course  for  excessive  absence. 

In  the  east  all  the  institutions  I  have  visited,  except  Harvard, 
have  a  cut  system  more  or  less  strictly  administered,  and  with 
various  penalties  for  overcutting.  At  Columbia  the  system  is  a 
little  more  generous  than  at  Dartmouth.  Instructors  keep  the 
record ;  the  office  gets  only  the  totals.  The  committee  on  instruc- 
tion considers  individual  cases  of  excessive  absence  and  decides 
whether  the  student  shall  be  permitted  to  take  the  examination. 
If  permitted,  he  must  gain  C  or  better  in  order  to  pass  the  course. 
But  departments  use  their  discretion,  and  there  is  much  variation. 
At  Princeton  the  number  of  allowed  absences  from  the  class-room 
exercises  of  a  year  has  recently  been  reduced  from  49  to  39.  The 
penalty  for  excessive  absences  is  an  extra  three  hour  course. 
Juniors  and  seniors  in  the  first  and  second  groups  and  candidates 
for  final  special  honors  are  excused  from  compulsory  attendance. 

At  Yale  freshmen  are  allowed  twelve  cuts  each  semester;  others, 
fifteen.  They  are  cumulative  from  semester  to  semester.  All 
allowed  cuts  may  be  taken  in  a  single  course,  but  an  instructor  may 
refuse  credit  to  a  man  who,  in  his  opinion,  has  had  an  excessive 
number  of  absences.  When  a  student  has  taken  fifteen  absences, 
he  receives  a  warning.  If  his  absences  continue  he  is  put  on  pro- 
bation and  is  required  to  take  extra  hours.  In  honor  courses 
attendance  is  not  compulsory. 

At  Williams  the  regular  allowance  is  five  per  cent  of  the  exer- 
cises in  a  course ;  for  students  of  high  rank,  ten  per  cent.  There 
is  no  automatic  penalty  except  that  a  student  who  is  absent  half 
the  number  of  exercises  in  a  course  loses  the  course.  No  cuts  are 
allowed  in  the  departments  of  English,  elocution,  and  physical 
training.  At  Amherst  five  cuts  are  allowed  in  each  semester 
course.  There  is  some  laxity,  it  appears,  and  there  is  no  check 
upon  instructors  who  neglect  to  hand  in  their  records.  For  over- 
cutting  in  a  course  a  student's  grade  is  reduced  five  units  for  each 
absence ;  for  excessive  overcutting  he  may  lose  credit  for  the 
course.    The  whole  matter  is  in  the  hands  of  the  dean. 

The  system  at  Brown  is  well  planned  and  well  administered. 
A  student  is  allowed  eighteen  absences  each  semester ;  there  are  at 
least  in  theory  no  excuses  for  absences  beyond  this.  If  he  has 
taken  as  many  as  twelve  in  the  middle  of  the  semester  he  receives 
a  warning.  If  he  takes  more  than  eighteen  in  a  semester  he  may 
have  a  smaller  allowance  for  the  next  semester  or  may  be  for- 
bidden to  take  any  absence  without  excuse,  under  penalty  of 
separation.     If  a  student  takes  an  excessive  number  in  one  course, 

22 


the  instructor  may  report  him  to  the  attendance  committee  or  may 
give  zero  for  absences  which  he  regards  as  excessive. 

The  system  at  Harvard  is  very  lax  and  there  is  a  great  deal  of 
absence.  A  good  student  may  be  absent  a  considerable  part  of  the 
time  without  penalty  of  any  sort.  There  is  no  cut  system  and  no 
maximum  allowance.  A  student  who  has  been  cutting  a  good  deal 
may  be  called  to  the  office  and  warned,  or  may  be  penalized  by 
his  instructors ;  but  his  treatment  depends  largely  upon  the  quality 
of  his  college  work. 

In  the  matter  of  attendance  the  western  attitude  is  decidedly 
worthy  of  consideration.  In  the  east  we  have  cut  systems  and 
definite  penalties, — at  Dartmouth  a  machinelike  system  perfectly 
administered, — and  we  have  a  good  deal  of  absence,  much  of 
which  is  unnecessary.  In  the  west  there  are  no  cut  systems  and 
such  rules  as  exist  are  loosely  administered  or  absolutely  ignored, — 
and  the  amount  of  absence  is  almost  negligible.  Allowed  cuts 
certainly  tempt  a  student  to  neglect  his  work  without  cause  and 
the  combination  cut-and-excuse  system  results  in  a  good  deal  of 
absence. 

It  is  apparent  from  conditions  at  Harvard  that  in  the  east  we 
may  not  assume  that  students  will  attend  their  college  exercises  as 
a  matter  of  course.  More  or  less  coercion,  careful  supervision,  and 
definite  penalties  are  evidently  necessary.  It  would  be  an  interest- 
ing experiment  if  some  eastern  college  would  abandon  the  cut  sys- 
tem and  require  the  student  to  attend  all  his  college  exercises  unless 
excused  by  the  proper  authority. 

Faculty  Regulation  of  Student  Activities 

The  two  extremes  in  this  matter  are  represented  best,  perhaps, 
by  Yale  and  the  University  of  Wisconsin.  At  Yale  the  faculty 
have  practically  nothing  to  do  with  student  activities ;  there  are  no 
faculty  members  on  the  athletic  council,  and  even  the  alumni  mem- 
bers are  appointed  by  the  undergraduates.  There  is,  moreover,  no 
systematic  supervision  of  non-athletic  activities.  At  Wisconsin, 
on  the  other  hand,  faculty  control  is  practically  absolute.  A  univer- 
sity committee  appointed  by  the  president  controls  all  student 
activities,  athletic  and  otherwise.  Recently  one  alumnus  and  one 
undergraduate  have  been  added  to  this  committee. 

The  University  of  Colorado  has  an  athletic  board  consisting  of 
three  faculty  members  (one  is  chairman)  and  three  undergrad- 
uates, but  on  most  questions  the  chairman  has  two  votes.  On 
account  of  the  exaggerated  interest  of  the  alumni  it  has  been  found 
best  to  eliminate  them  from  the  board.  At  Princeton  the  athletic 
council  consists  of  three  trustees,  three  members  of  the  faculty, 
three  alumni,  and  three  undergraduates.  This  council  has  general 
charge  of  athletics,  but  a  faculty  committee  has  authority  in  ques- 
tions of  eligibility.     Also  at  Western  Reserve  and  at  Minnesota  a 

23 


faculty  committee  decides  questions  of  eligibility,  and  the  Minne- 
sota committee  controls  athletic  finances.  The  Minnesota  com- 
mittee has  expelled  students  who  have  been  convicted  of  false- 
hood regarding  the  taking  of  money  for  athletics.  At  Harvard 
Dean  Briggs,  chairman  of  the  committee  on  the  regulation  of  ath- 
letic sports,  has  power  in  questions  of  eligibility.  At  Ohio  State 
the  athletic  council  consists  of  five  members  of  the  university 
faculty,  two  alumni,  and  two  undergraduates.  Other  institutions, 
so  far  as  I  have  noted,  have  a  system  like  that  at  Dartmouth, — 
a  council  consisting  of  faculty,  alumni,  and  students,  the  faculty 
members  having  predominant  power  only  in  matters  pertaining  to 
scholarship  and  attendance. 

In  most  places  I  find  that  non-athletic  activities  seem  not  to  re- 
quire much  supervision.  Princeton  has  a  special  faculty  commit- 
tee for  this  purpose.  The  faculty  committee  at  Wisconsin  controls 
all  student  activities.  At  Minnesota  a  committee  consisting  of  two 
members  of  the  faculty,  two  alumni,  and  seven  students  has  general 
charge  of  all  activities,  though  final  authority  rests  with  a  faculty 
committee  of  five  members.  At  California  a  council  of  faculty, 
alumni,  and  students  controls  all  activities.  In  other  places  I  have 
not  noted  any  specific  supervision  of  non-athletic  interests.  In  fact, 
I  gained  the  very  definite  impression  that  elsewhere  non-athletic 
activities  do  not  play  so  important  a  part  in  student  life  as  they  do 
at  Dartmouth. 

It  is  a  universal  rule  that  students  on  probation  are  not  allowed 
to  represent  the  college.  In  the  matter  of  removal  from  an  organ- 
ization for  deficient  scholarship  during  a  semester  there  is  varia- 
tion and  the  Dartmouth  custom  by  comparison  appears  somewhat 
lax.  At  Amherst  a  student  is  not  removed  from  a  team  unless  he 
is  reported  as  failing  in  three  courses,  but  he  is  not  allowed  to  re- 
turn during  the  semester.  At  Williams  students  having  two  D's 
are  removed  and  are  not  allowed  to  return  during  the  semester. 
At  Western  Reserve  a  student  is  removed  if  at  any  time  he  is 
deficient  in  two  subjects,  or  if  he  is  reported  deficient  in  the  same 
subject  for  two  consecutive  weeks;  and  he  may  not  return  during 
the  semester.  At  Chicago  a  student  removed  from  an  organization 
is  not  allowed  to  return  in  the  same  quarter.  At  Michigan,  where 
the  control  of  athletics  is  very  strict,  no  one  who  has  had  a  failure 
in  the  previous  semester  may  represent  the  college. 

In  very  few  institutions  have  I  found  restriction  of  the  number 
of  organizations  to  which  a  student  may  belong  or  the  offices  he 
may  hold.  At  Oberlin,  Minnesota,  and  Colorado  College  there 
are  point  systems ;  that  is,  each  activity  is  rated  by  points  accord- 
ing to  the  time  it  is  supposed  to  consume,  and  no  student  is  per- 
mitted to  carry  more  than  a  certain  number  of  points.  The  restric- 
tion is,  however,  by  no  means  severe.  At  Oberlin,  for  example,  a 
student  may  play  in  one  year  football,  basketball,  and  baseball.  A 
similar  system  at  Chicago  has  been  abandoned.     There  is  a  point 

24 


system  at  Brown,  but  it  is  applied  only  to  official  positions, — man- 
agerships, etc. — in  the  various  organizations.  At  Western  Reserve 
membership  in  more  than  one  organization  or  participation  in 
more  than  two  sports  requires  the  permission  of  the  executive  com- 
mittee. At  Stanford  no  student  may  take  part  in  more  than  one 
dramatic  performance  during  a  semester. 

VI.  Undergraduates 
Self -Government 

Under  this  head  there  are  two  points  to  be  considered: — first, 
the  composition  of  the  governing  body ;  secondly,  its  functions. 

Dartmouth  with  a  council  composed  entirely  of  seniors,  a  major- 
ity of  whom  are  ex-officio  members,  stands  practically  alone.  Only 
Princeton  and  Minnesota  have  a  system  of  this  sort,  and  at  Minne- 
sota the  members  are  all  elected.  Elsewhere  the  council  is  much 
more  representative  and,  whether  for  this  reason  or  not,  is  in 
many  places  much  more  active  and  influential.  The  usual  plan 
provides  for  one  or  two  freshmen  and  a  gradually  increasing  num- 
ber from  the  upper  classes.  The  presidents  of  the  four  classes  are 
commonly  members  of  the  council.  Rarely  a  member  of  the 
faculty  is  included.  This  is  the  case  at  the  University  of  Colorado 
and  at  Colorado  College.  At  Ohio  State  the  president  of  the 
university  has  regular  meetings  with  the  council.  At  Stanford  the 
chairman  of  the  faculty  committee  on  student  affairs  attends  cer- 
tain meetings  of  the  student  conference.  At  Williams  the  council 
has  joint  meetings  with  a  faculty  committee. 

There  are  three  things  which  may  come  within  the  powers  of  a 
student  council : — first,  general  oversight  of  student  affairs, — for 
example,  class  elections  and  contests,  privileges,  and  customs;  sec- 
ondly, violations  of  the  honor  system ;  thirdly,  general  discipline 
and  the  assignment  of  penalties  for  misdemeanors.  In  the  east 
the  activity  of  the  council  is  usually  confined  to  the  first  of  these 
three  things.  At  Yale  there  is  one  council  for  the  college  and 
another  for  the  scientific  school,  both  composed  of  strong,  repre- 
sentative men,  whose  recommendations  are  practically  always 
adopted  by  the  faculty.  The  council  of  the  scientific  school  admin- 
isters the  honor  system.  To  neither  council  has  the  discipline  of 
the  institution  been  formally  entrusted,  as  is  the  case  in  some  west- 
ern colleges ;  but  both  councils  appear  to  be  active  and  useful. 

Brown  has  no  regular  council  for  men ;  but  the  Cammarian 
Club,  a  self -perpetuating  organization,  seems  to  have  functions 
similar  to  those  of  the  Dartmouth  Palaeopitus.  The  women's 
council,  through  recommendations  to  the  dean  of  women,  is  virtu- 
ally in  control  of  disciplinary  matters  in  the  women's  college. 
Harvard  has  a  council  which,  except  that  it  has  representatives 
from  all  classes,  is  like  Palaeopitus.  Amherst  has  a  council  con- 
sisting of  five  seniors,  three  juniors,  and  one  sophomore  elected  by 

25 


their  respective  classes.  It  has  general  supervision  of  athletics,  the 
honor  system,  college  customs,  and  undergraduate  policy.  At 
Princeton  the  council  has  the  same  general  and  somewhat  vague 
functions  as  is  the  case  in  most  of  the  New  England  colleges.  The 
honor  system  is  administered  by  a  special  committee,  distinct  from 
the  council. 

In  the  central  states,  as  in  the  east,  the  student  council  is  not  an 
important  factor  in  administration.  At  Western  Reserve  and 
Minnesota  the  council  administers  the  honor  system,  but  otherwise 
there  seem  to  be  no  specific  or  important  duties.  At  Wisconsin,  on 
the  other  hand,  the  council  has  more  power  and  a  somewhat 
elaborate  organization, — a  legislative  body  called  the  conference 
and  a  court  to  which  cases  of  discipline  may  be  referred.  The 
court  has  the  power  of  suspension,  subject  to  appeal  to  the 
faculty. 

In  the  west  students  are  very  much  interested  in  self-govern- 
ment; and  in  some  institutions  have  acquired  complete  control  in 
all  matters  of  discipline.  At  Colorado  College  the  student  com- 
mission has  conferences  with  the  faculty  and  is  entitled  to  be 
heard  before  legislation  is  passed  affecting  non-academic  activities. 
With  certain  exceptions,  it  manages  all  such  activities.  The  execu- 
tive board  of  the  commission  has  charge  of  the  discipline  of  the 
college.  At  the  University  of  Colorado  the  council  has  the  power 
of  suspension,  subject  to  appeal  to  the  president.  At  Stanford  the 
conference  consists  of  representatives  from  what  is  termed  the 
'living  groups ;"  that  is,  dormitories,  fraternities,  etc.,  and  each 
representative  is  made  responsible  for  his  group.  There  is  a  meet- 
ing of  the  conference  every  two  weeks  and  attendance  is  compul- 
sory. There  is,  likewise,  a  judicial  committee  of  the  conference, 
called  the  council,  which  considers  all  cases  of  discipline  and  has 
power  to  assign  the  penalties  of  expulsion,,  suspension,  probation, 
and  extra  hours,  subject  to  the  approval  of  a  faculty  committee. 

At  California  the  council  (called  the  undergraduate  student 
affairs  committee)  considers  all  cases  of  discipline  and  makes 
recommendation  to  the  president  of  the  university,  who  usually  in- 
duces the  student  to  accept  the  action  of  the  committee  without 
reference  to  the  faculty.  Confidence  in  the  council  is  said  to  be 
constantly  increasing.  Reed  College  has  a  council  of  six  members 
elected  annually  by  vote  of  all  the  students.  The  council  has  charge 
of  discipline  and  student  affairs,  including  the  honor  system. 

The  Dartmouth  Palaeopitus,  compared  with  these  western  coun- 
cils, is  little  more  than  an  honorary  organization.  I  have  been 
rather  favorably  impressed  with  the  results  of  the  western  system, 
and  I  am  inclined  to  think  that,  if  the  Palaeopitus  were  somewhat 
differently  constituted — especially  if  it  included  representatives 
from  all  classes — and  were  given  more  definite  powers  and  respon- 
sibilities, it  might  be  av  greater  help  in  the  administration  of  the 
college,  not  only  in  matters  of  discipline,  but  also  in  the  general 
spirit  of  the  student  body. 

26 


The  Honor  System 

In  those  institutions  in  which  the  honor  system  is  carefully  ad- 
ministered, where  students  report  cases  of  dishonesty  and  the  pen- 
alty is  severe,  the  system  a  success.  I  have  found  it  in  operation 
in  about  half  the  institutions  visited. 

In  the  Sheffield  Scientific  School  it  is  administered  by  a  com- 
mittee of  five  students,  containing  at  least  three  members  chosen 
from  and  by  the  student  council.  Students  report  cases  of  dis- 
honesty and  the  penalty  of  expulsion  may  be  inflicted  by  a  unani- 
mous vote  of  the  committee.  It  is  agreed  that  the  system  is  success- 
ful. The  students  of  Yale  College  voted  not  to  adopt  the  system, 
on  the  ground  that  they  were  unwilling  to  report  fellow  students. 

At  Amherst  results  are  by  no  means  so  satisfactory.  Students 
sign  a  statement  to  the  effect  that  they  have  not  given  or  received 
help  during  the  examination.  They  do  not  report  cases  of  dishon- 
esty, though  at  the  outset  they  agreed  to  do  so.  Information  comes, 
therefore,  only  from  members  of  the  faculty.  Cases  are  handled 
by  a  committee  of  students  and  the  penalty  is  comparatively  light, — 
suspension.  The  situation  at  Williams  is  much  better.  Students 
report  cases  of  dishonesty  to  a  student  committee,  which  makes 
recommendation  to  the  faculty.  The  penalty  is  more  severe, — sus- 
pension for  freshmen,  expulsion  for  upperclassmen.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  the  instructor  is  present  at  the  examination  a  good  deal  of 
the  time.  Indeed,  the  students  recently  petitioned  that  he  be  re- 
quired to  be  within  reach  during  the  whole  examination  in  order 
to  answer  questions. 

It  is  the  general,  though  not  unanimous,  sentiment  at  Princeton 
that  the  system  is  a  success.  It  is  said  that  the  most  important 
result  is  the  development  of  a  sense  of  honor.  Cases  of  dishonesty 
are  reported  by  the  students  and  handled  by  a  student  committee; 
the  penalty  is  expulsion.  There  are  several  cases  every  year.  The 
system  at  Princeton  is  rather  more  far-reaching  than  elsewhere; 
it  is  applied  to  every  kind  of  work,  including  class  quizzes,  and  a 
member  of  the  Latin  Department  has  applied  it  to  the  use  of  trans- 
lations. 

At  Western  Reserve  there  is  disagreement  as  to  the  success  of 
the  system.  Some  instructors  think  there  is  much  dishonesty,  and 
one  man  who  spoke  highly  of  the  system  admitted  that  if  a  student 
sees  another  cheating  he  is  more  likely  to  warn  him  than  to  report 
him.  At  Oberlin  reports  are  made  by  students  to  a  court  appointed 
by  the  student  senate.  Expulsion  is  the  penalty  for  serious  cases ; 
suspension  or  reprimand  for  those  less  serious.  Results  are  said  to 
be  entirely  satisfactory.  At  Minnesota  the  system  appears  to  be 
working  fairly  well,  though  certain  officers  of  the  university  speak 
of  it  very  doubtfully.  There  are  five  or  six  cases  of  dishonesty  a 
year  in  final  examinations.  In  serious  cases  the  penalty  is  suspen- 
sion for  one  or  more  years,  but  students  suspended  for  this  cause 

27 


rarely  return  to  college ;  in  less  serious  cases  the  student  loses  credit 
for  the  course.  The  system  is  applied  to  all  written  work,  but  is 
not  used  in  freshman  courses. 

At  Occidental,  Reed,  and  Washington,  results  are  said  to  have 
been  entirely  satisfactory.  At  Stanford  and  California,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  honor  system  appears  at  its  worst.  At  California, 
by  the  way,  it  is  called  honor  spirit,  not  the  honor  system;  and,  in 
fact,  at  neither  place  is  it  sufficiently  organized  to  be  called  a  system. 
Departments  or  individual  instructors  use  their  discretion  in  the 
matter  of  leaving  the  examination  room.  There  is  no  pledge  and 
students  refuse  to  report  one  another.  At  Stanford  it  is  the  duty 
of  members  of  the  conference  (the  student  council)  to  report  or 
warn  students  whom  they  see  cheating.  They  are  required  to  report 
a  second  offense.  In  both  places  the  penalty  is  very  light, — loss  of 
credit  in  the  course  for  the  first  offense.  Dishonesty  is  common 
and  few  cases  are  reported.  Students  at  Stanford  admit  that,  in 
some  courses,  there  are  epidemics  of  cheating.  They  offer  the 
naive  excuse  that,  since  some  instructors  remain  in  the  room  and 
others  dd  not,  they  do  not  regard  the  honor  system  as  definitely 
established.  There  was  a  thorough  investigation  last  year  and  no 
doubt  conditions  have  already  been  improved. 

It  is  apparent  that  the  honor  system  cannot  be  operated  success- 
fully unless  students  agree  to  report  one  another  and  carry  out 
their  agreement  in  all  cases,  regardless  of  personal  or  social  con- 
siderations. In  places  where  it  works  well  they  tell  of  students  who 
have  reported  members  of  the  same  fraternity.  Moreover,  the  pen- 
alty for  dishonesty  must  be  severe, — nothing  short  of  expulsion. 
A  system  that  tolerates  the  first  offense  or  allows  it  to  go  with  a 
warning  or  a  reprimand  is  very  likely  to  become  a  dishonor  system. 

At  two  other  institutions,  Ohio  State  and  Wisconsin,  though  the 
honor  system  nominally  does  not  exist,  instructors  may  leave  their 
examination  rooms  if  they  wish.  Practically,  the  situation  is  like 
that  at  Stanford  and  California.  At  Wisconsin  conditions  appear 
to  be  pretty  bad.  The  only  penalty  for  dishonesty  is  the  loss  of  a 
few  hours.  At  Chicago,  though  the  honor  system  is  not  in  use, 
cases  of  dishonesty  are  reported  to  a  student  committee  which  may 
make  recommendation  to  the  faculty.  The  penalty  is  light:  for 
the  first  offense,  loss  of  credit  in  the  course. 

Where  the  honor  system  is  not  in  use,  the  conduct  of  examina- 
tions is  usually  left  to  the  various  departments;  that  is,  instructors 
are  made  responsible  for  their  own  examinations.  Nowhere  except 
at  Harvard — where  graduate  students  serve  as  proctors — have  I 
found  a  proctoring  system  operated  entirely  from  the  office,  as  at 
Dartmouth;  or  an  examination  schedule  managed  in  such  a  busi- 
nesslike way  and  with  so  few  cases  of  dishonesty.  It  seems  to  me 
that  it  is  as  near  perfection  as  any  part  of  our  administrative  system. 
Regarding  the   honor   system   I   am   inclined  to   agree   with   Dean 


28 


Briggs  that  "it  ministers  to  a  mistaken  sensitiveness,  endangers  the 
authenticity  of  the  college  degree,  and  imposes  on  the  conscientious 
student  a  duty  he  is  better  off  without." 

The  Attitude  of  Students  toward  their  College  Work 

If  we  may  rely  upon  the  memory  and  judgment  of  instructors 
who  have  gone  from  Dartmouth  to  other  institutions,  we  have  no 
reason  to  congratulate  ourselves  upon  the  attitude  of  our  students 
toward  the  requirements  of  the  College.  Almost  everywhere — even 
in  New  England — when  I  asked  a  man  to  compare  Dartmouth 
students  with  others,  I  received  the  reply,  "The  students  here  are 
more  serious ;"  or,  "They  learn  their  lessons  better." 

I  give  these  criticisms  for  what  they  may  be  worth,  without  un- 
dertaking to  express  an  opinion  as  to  the  justice  of  them.  It  is 
not  surprising  to  hear  such  statements  in  the  central  states  or  in 
the  west.  As  I  have  already  said,  most  of  the  students  in  those 
parts  of  the  country  not  only  attend  classes  but  learn  lessons  as  a 
matter  of  course.  There  are  just  as  many — perhaps  more — poorly 
prepared,  but  there  are  by  no  means  so  many  who  persistently 
neglect  their  work  or  are  satisfied  with  a  passing  mark.  I  got  an 
interesting  criticism  at  Minnesota,  to  the  effect  that  students  there 
were  not  so  mature  as  in  the  east,  that  they  lacked  originality  and 
power  of  independent  thought,  but  were  more  serious-minded  and 
learned  their  lessons  better. 

Reed  College  offers  the  best  illustration  of  the  western  attitude. 
I  was  particularly  impressed  by  the  fact  that  at  that  institution, 
when  an  instructor  does  not  appear,  a  student  is  chosen  to  preside 
and  the  class  goes  on  just  the  same.  Once  when  the  whole  faculty 
had  to  go  away  to  a  meeting  lasting  three  days,  the  work  of  the 
college  was  carried  on  in  this  way  without  interruption. 

In  1902  the  Harvard  Faculty  of  Arts  and  Sciences  voted:  "That 
a  committee  be  appointed  to  inquire  and  report  what  further  meas- 
ures may  be  advantageously  taken  to  improve  the  quality  of  the 
work  done  in  satisfaction  of  the  requirements  for  the  degree  of 
Bachelor  of  Arts."  This  committee  made  the  surprising  discovery 
that  the  average  amount  of  work  done  by  an  undergraduate  in  a 
course  was  less  than  three  and  a  half  hours  a  week  outside  of  the 
class-room.  That  is,  the  average  undergraduate  was  working  in 
all  less  than  twenty-six  hours  a  week.  The  committee  recently 
appointed  at  Chicago,  primarily  for  the  standardization  of  courses, 
will  undoubtedly  proceed  along  the  same  line  as  the  Harvard  com- 
mittee. A  similar  investigation  at  Dartmouth  might  produce  some 
interesting  results. 

Fraternities  and  Clubs 

In  several  places  I  have  heard  the  complaint  that  fraternities 
exercise  a  bad  influence  upon  either  the  intellectual  or  the  social 
life   of   the   college   community.      This    criticism   was   made   most 

29 


emphatically  perhaps  at  Yale  (the  Scientific  School),  Williams, 
Ohio  State,  and  California.  On  the  other  hand  the  senior  societies 
at  Yale  seem  to  exert  a  particularly  good  influence.  It  is  a  well- 
known  fact  that  men  are  elected  to  these  societies  who  have  accom- 
plished something;  not  merely  because  they  are  good  fellows.  It 
is  also  true  that  they  show  a  high  regard  for  literary  ability  and 
achievement  and  will  not  consider  a  man  who  drinks  to  excess  or  is 
morally  objectionable.  The  ambition  to  become  a  member  of  one 
of  these  societies  has  done  much  for  college  spirit  at  Yale.  I  should 
mention  also  the  very  successful  Elizabethan  Club  at  Yale,  a  club 
for  men  of  intellectual  interests,  and  an  interesting  parallel  to  our 
new  organization,  The  Arts. 

Fraternity  conditions  at  Brown  seem  to  be  excellent.  There 
are  many  alumni  in  Providence  who  endeavor  to  keep  up  the  stand- 
ard of  scholarship  in  their  fraternities.  One  alumnus  has  given 
a  cup  for  the  fraternity  making  the  best  record. 

At  California  there  has  recently  been  a  great  improvement  in  this 
matter,  due  to  the  efforts  of  the  fraternities  themselves.  The  aver- 
age standing  of  fraternity  members  is  now  higher  than  that  of  non- 
fraternity  men.  An  interesting  plan  has  been,  put  into  operation 
which  provides  for  fellowships,  one  to  be  maintained  by  each 
fraternity,  the  incumbent  to  receive  board  and  room  and,  in  return, 
to  do  some  tutoring  for  his  fellow  members  and,  in  general,  to  act 
as  the  representative  of  the  fraternity  in  relations  with  the  faculty. 

We  might  learn  something,  I  think,  from  fraternity  rules  at 
Stanford.  After  dinner  in  one  fraternity  house  I  noticed  that 
members  who  had  been  playing  and  singing  disappeared  at  7.30, 
and  was  told  that  it  was  the  rule  that  there  should  be  no  music 
after  that  hour,  and  that  freshmen  were  required  to  study  in  the 
evening.  The  same  rule,  I  found,  was  in  force  in  other  houses, 
and  also  the  rule  that  there  should  be  no  card  playing  except 
between  Friday  noon  and  Saturday  night.  Fraternity  upperclass- 
men  make  their  freshmen  mix  with  others  and  there  is  no  dis- 
crimination against  non-fraternity  men.  The  Union  (like  our  Col- 
lege Club)  is  a  real  club  for  everyone  including  members  of  the 
faculty. 

At  Wisconsin,  on  the  other  hand,  conditions  seem  to  be  rather 
bad.  Only  comparatively  rich  men  can  belong  to  fraternities. 
Non-fraternity  men  are  waiters  in  fraternity  houses  and,  in  general, 
there*  is  a  sharp  distinction  between  fraternity  and  non-fraternity 
men.  Strangely  enough,  however,  in  general  student  affairs  the 
non- fraternity  men,  through  the  student  council,  have  the  upper 
hand.  They  do  not  allow  the  fraternities  to  give  house-parties  and, 
it  is  said,  were  recently  considering  the  prohibition  of  evening 
clothes. 


30 


VII.  Miscellaneous .  .-    .' 

I  may  note  finally  a  few  points  which  seem  to  deserve  considera- 
tion and  have  not  found  a  place  under  more  specific  headings. 

In  several  institutions  it  is  the  custom  to  have  frequent  informal 
faculty  meetings  in  the  faculty  club  house  for  the  discussion  of  col- 
lege business.  I  attended  such  a  meeting  at  Columbia  and  another 
at  Stanford.  In  both  cases  someone  had  been  appointed  to  open 
the  subject  and  the  discussion  was  general  and  interesting.  At 
Columbia  it  is  the  custom  for  this  informal  meeting  to  make 
recommendations  to  the  faculty,  and,  as  the  two  bodies  are  identi- 
cal, the  informal  meeting  may  do  a  good  deal  of  business.  At 
Stanford,  though  no  vote  was  taken,  it  was  practically  decided  at 
the  meeting  I  attended  to  adopt  the  four-quarter  year.  At  the 
University  of  Washington  similar  informal  meetings  are  held,  not 
limited,  however,  to  the  discussion  of  academic  subjects.  We  have 
had  a  few  meetings  of  this  sort  at  Dartmouth,  but  it  occurred  to 
me  that  we  might  make  rather  more  of  them  than  we  do. 

I  was  struck  also  with  the  possibilities  of  the  Columbia  forum, 
an  occasional  meeting  of  students  and  faculty  for  the  free  discus- 
sion of  matters  of  current  college  interest.  There  is  a  similar  de- 
vice at  California,  the  University  Meeting,  as  it  is  called.  Presi- 
dent Wheeler  speaks  highly  of  this  meeting  as  a  means  of  develop- 
ing civic  consciousness. 

It  was  something  of  a  surprise  to  find  that  the  preceptorial  sys- 
tem at  Princeton  had  dwindled  until  it  is  now  applied  almost  exclu- 
sively to  advanced  English  courses  and  the  studies  of  the  social 
science  group.  Not  only  was  it  very  expensive,  but  it  was  found 
to  be  superfluous  in  courses  with  many  sections  and  in  advanced 
courses  with  few  students.  So,  as  preceptors  went  away,  their 
places  were  not  filled.  The  system  is  now  on  a  sound  basis,  and  it 
is  thought  that  it  will  survive  in  its  present  form. 

There  is  a  growing  college  interest,  I  think,  in  the  development 
of  intramural  sports,  due  partly  to  a  reaction  against  the  exaggera- 
tions of  intercollegiate  sports.  Reed  College  is  a  good  example  of 
what  may  be  done  where  intercollegiate  sports  are  forbidden. 
There  is  an  intense  interest  in  inter-class  games  of  all  sorts ;  every- 
one seems  to  take  part  in  some  kind  of  game ;  and  the  whole  situa- 
tion seemed  to  me  very  healthv.  The  faculty  at  Western  Reserve 
has  been  giving  much  attention  to  this  subject.  At  Princeton 
since  1910  the  intracollegiate  athletic  association  has  been  a  formal 
organization  having  fourteen  different  sports  under  its  supervision. 
As  the  president  says,  in  his  report  for  1915,  this  organization  is 
unique.  The  success  of  the  work,  he  savs,  is  shown  by  the  crowds 
of  men  who  frequent  the  gymnasium,  the  tennis  courts  (there  are 
twenty-eig:ht  and  there  should  be  twice  as  many),  the  lake  and  the 
baseball  fields,  to  take  part  in  practice  or  contests  for  the  various 
championships.     In  1914-1915  there  were  842  men  on  non-varsity 

31 


teams.  At  Harvard  much  attention  is  being  given  to  freshman  sports, 
especially  to  freshman  interdormitory  games.  Moreover,  fifty- 
three  tennis  courts  are  in  constant  use.  In  this  phase  of  college 
life  we  are  not  keeping  up  with  other  institutions.  The  Outing 
Club  provides  certain  forms  of  exercise  in  the  winter,  but  several 
additional  handball  courts  would  be  of  great  benefit  and  funds,  if 
available,  could  probably  not  be  spent  to  greater  advantage  than  in 
the  construction  of  additional  tennis  courts. 

In  many  places  I  have  found  a  system  of  extension  courses  and 
what  may  be  called  extension  lectures.  Even  in  Massachusetts 
such  lectures  are  given  by  members  of  the  various  college  faculties, 
the  expense,  in  some  cases  at  least,  being  defrayed  in  one  way  or 
another  by  the  communities  where  the  courses  are  given. 
It  has  occurred  to'  me  that  the  Dartmouth  faculty  might  do  some 
work  of  this  sort  outside  of  Hanover,  to  the  advantage  of  the 
College  as  well  as  to  that  of  the  communities  where  such  lectures 
might  be  given.  I  find  that  college  teachers  regard  the  payment 
for  these  lectures  as  a  very  welcome  addition  to  their  incomes. 
Moreover,  there  is  no  reason  to  assume  that  there  would  not  be  as 
much  demand  for  lectures  of  this  sort  in  New  Hampshire  as  in 
other  states.  I  feel  strongly  that:there  is  an  opportunity  here  for 
Dartmouth  to  prove  her  usefulness  to  the  state,  and  I  would  sug- 
gest the  appointment  of  a  committee — possibly  of  trustees  and 
members  of  the  faculty — to  consider  the  advisability  of  such  a 
plan  and  the  possible  methods  of  its  operation. 

I  wish  to  express  to  the  trustees  my  sincere  gratitude  for  the 
opportunity  they  have  given  me  to  undertake  this  investigation ; 
to  me  personally  it  has  been  a  work  of  great  interest  and  value. 

Respectfully  submitted, 

H.  E.  Burton. 
Dartmouth  College,  October,  1916. 


m 


GAYLAMOUNT 
PAMPHLET  BINDER 

Manufactured  by 

©AYLORD  BROS.  In*,  i 

Syracuse,  N.  Y. 

Stockton,  CiW. 


C0Dt3Dfc3313fl 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 
BERKELEY 

Return  to  desk  from  which  borrowed. 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


3fc 


gg>16l9! 


80c' 


*S2PB 


-.  C  I  t 


JAN  2    I96S 
20^7  -9 


nkugW 
REC'D  LD 


AUG  '  ^  -956 


LD  21-95ro-ll,,50  (2877s 


AM 


MAY  0  5 1989 


sas£p02  -88 


